The Constitutional Court has consolidated two petitions challenging some provisions of the newly enacted Administration of Judiciary Act 2020, such that they can be heard and determined at once.
One of the petitions was filed by lawyer Steven Kalali challenging some of the provisions he said were discriminatory in nature against public servants who are not entitled to similar emoluments upon retirement like the top judicial officers.
The other one was filed by a one Gad Arthur Kisaalu challenging Section 17 of the Act which established the office of the Secretary of the Judiciary, to be responsible for the organization of the Judiciary implementing its administrative activities and policies of government.
The petitioners yesterday appeared before a Panel of Five Justices which heard their respective cases after consolidation and promised to deliver judgement on notice.
The Justices are: Irene Mulyagonja, Oscar Kihika, Margaret Tibulya, Moses Kazibwe Kawumi and Asa Mugenyi.
The Judiciary Administration Act came into force on June, 19th, 2020 following assent by President Museveni.
The act is meant to strengthen the Judiciary as an independent arm of government and provides for the continued payment of monthly salary to a retired Chief Justice and his deputy on top of receiving a lump sum package equivalent to 2.4 percent of his or her annual salary multiplied by five and the total number of years spent in service.
According to provisions in the same law, retired Justices of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the Principal Judge, and Judges of the High Court, will continue getting 80 percent of their salaries once they have clocked their respective mandatory ages of retirement.
They will also get a lump-sum retirement benefit equivalent to 2.4 percent of their annual salary multiplied by five and their years of service, entitled to state security, chauffeur-driven cars, and annual medical and housing allowances.
However, the act excludes registrars and magistrates from the provision of security, cars, medical and housing allowances despite the fact that they will continue earning their monthly salary for life.
As a result, Kalali told the Court that some of the provisions in the Judiciary Act are discriminatory against public servants in different government entities who are not entitled to the same emoluments upon retirement and wants court to declare the same unconstitutional.
